RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Damage control surgery aims to control hemorrhage and contamination in the operating room (OR) with definitive management of injuries delayed until normal physiology is restored in the intensive care unit (ICU). There are limited studies evaluating the use of damage control thoracotomy (DCT) in trauma, and the best method of temporary closure is unclear. METHODS: A retrospective review of trauma patients at two level I trauma centers who underwent a thoracotomy operation was performed. Subjects who underwent a thoracotomy after 24 h, age less than 16, expired in the trauma bay, or in the OR prior to ICU admission were excluded. One-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis test were used to compare continuous and categorical variables between DCT and definitive thoracotomy (DT) patients. RESULTS: 207 trauma patients underwent thoracotomy, 76 met our inclusion criteria. DCT was performed in 30 patients (39%), 46 (61 %) underwent DT operation. Techniques for temporizing the chest varied from skin closure with suture (8), adhesive dressing (5), towel clamps (2), or negative pressure devices (12). Compared to definitive closure, DCT had more derangements in HR, pH, (110 vs. 95, p = 0.04; 7.05 vs 7.24, p < 0.001), and injury severity score (41 vs 25, p < 0.001), and required more blood transfusions (40 vs 6, p < 0.001). Eleven (36.7 %) DCT patients survived to discharge compared to 38 patients (95.0 %) in the DT group. DCT showed significantly higher differences in cardiac arrest and unplanned returns to the OR rates. No differences were observed in ventilator days, or ICU length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: DCT is a viable option for management of patients in extremis following thoracic trauma. DCT was associated with higher mortality rates, likely due to differences in injury and physiologic derangement. Despite this, DCT was associated with similar rates of complications, ICU stay, and ventilator days.